Jeff Thompson Research Application

Page 1
International Baccalaureate Organization 2011

Professor Jeff Thompson Research Award
Application Form

Name and school details
Surname:
Rodick
Given names:
William
School Name: Escola Americana de Belo
Horizonte
IB School code: 000123
School address:
Avenida Professor Mario Werneck, 3002 Bairro Buritis
Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil 30575-180
Country:
Brazil
Position in school:
Curriculum Coordinator
Tel: +55 31 3378-6700 Fax: +55 31 3378-6878
Email: william@eabh.com.br
rodickwh@gmail.com
Name of school head/principal/CEO:
Director Catarina Song Chen
Email of school head/principal/CEO:
director@eabh.com.br

Professional details
Teaching experience:
Escola Americana de Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2011-Current
Curriculum Coordinator, Dean of Students, AP English Teacher
IB MYP Year 5 Language A Teacher
Escola Americana de Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2009-2011
AP English Teacher, IB MYP Years 2-5 Language A Teacher
Singapore International School, India, 2008-2009
English Teacher for grades 3, 5, 7, and 8
Ivanna Eudora Kean High School, U.S. Virgin Islands, 2007-2008
English Teacher for grades 10 and 11, ESL Teacher, Writing Teacher
Leone High School, American Samoa, 2006-2007
English Teacher for grades 10 and 11
Qualifications:
Graduate Certificate in Advanced International Baccalaureate Studies, Fast Train
George Mason University 2011-2012
Page 2
M.Ed.: Curriculum and Instruction, Advanced Studies in Teaching and Learning
George Mason University 2011-2013
B.A.: English
James Madison University 2005
Previous research experience:
Some within graduate coursework
Previous research awards (if applicable):
None
Publications (if applicable):
None

Project details
Maximum of 800 words for this section
Title:
Mapping Curriculum for Alignment and Articulation
Objective(s):
To evaluate the influence of online curriculum mapping and planning software on the
alignment and articulation of school curriculum with IB MYP standards and practices, by
assessing influence upon
1. Collaborative planning
2. Coverage of the Areas of Interaction
3. Summative assessment
Proposed activity and research methodology-- include at minimum in the methodology
description your research question(s), methods of qualitative and or quantitative data
collection, and method of data analysis:
Research Questions:
How effectively do online curriculum planning tools promote alignment, articulation and
teacher collaboration in the IB Middle Years Programme?
1. In what ways does an electronic curriculum design interface influence collaborative
planning of teachers in an MYP World School?
2. In what ways can teachers use online curriculum design to ensure balanced coverage
of the MYP Areas of Interaction?
3. a. Does implementation of online curriculum mapping make teachers more attentive
to summative assessment? If so, how?
b. In what ways does online mapping influence cross-curricular assessment?
4. Does implementation of an electronic curriculum design interface lead to greater
practice and delivery of IB programmes? If so, in what ways?
Page 3
Data Collection
1. Teachers will be surveyed before implementation (Appendix A), at least four times
during the process of use, and once upon project completion. Data includes self-
evaluation of practices and whole school evaluation. Some question content is
repeated to check consistency.
2. At least one assessment example per subject area will be collected and evaluated
(once at the beginning of the project and once at the end) using a rubric that
examines the presence and effectiveness of cross-curricular elements and AOI
connections. Data will be cross-referenced against data collected through surveys.
Data Analysis
1. Data derived from Google Forms surveys will be compiled based on type and coded
to provide assertions about collaboration, AOIs, assessment, differentiation, and 21
st

century skill instruction. Progressive, comparative qualitative and quantitative data will
indicate the degree of influence of the online mapping software on these areas.
2. The investigator will analyse data entered and used in the electronic curriculum
design interface, which will provide comparative data to the survey results, indicating
collaboration occurrence, interdisciplinary teaching presence, AOI balance, and
assessment success. This document review will occur using the mapping softwares
live interface that collects unit plans and discovers connections between plans.
3. Informal classroom observations will provide information about consistency between
plan elements and classroom teaching, particularly in the areas of 21
st
century skills,
international mindedness, and IB standards and practices.
*Please note: Development of the survey, research questions, and rubric required insight from
proven experts in education (Appendix F).

Timeline:
The initial survey will take place before the electronic curriculum design interface is put into
use at the school, and data will be collected for two full semesters of use.

Expected outcomes including relevance to the IB and benefits to the school:
Based on initial research, it is expected that the live curriculum mapping software will prove to
serve as a platform for communication and collaboration. It is expected that the integration
and connections between unit plans created by using the software will improve balance and
depth of AOI instruction, improve our standing in self-assessment criteria related to IB
standards and practices, and enhance the sharing of best practices that will allow for
improved differentiation and effective, authentic, summative assessment.
This project is directly relevant to the IB as we will evaluate and explore opportunities for
improving the implementation of IB curriculum at our school. This project will assist in the
alignment and articulation of the IB MYP (and following this project, the investigator will
similarly explore integration of the IB PYP with this research along with our other programs of
continuum). This project and its outcomes are aimed at exploration of student development as
international-minded, 21
st
century, lifelong learners.
The created opportunities for practitioner reflection, dialogue, resources, and skill building will
compensate for the limited opportunities our schedule allows for sharing practices and
collaborating for interdisciplinary teaching. Therefore, this research will prove useful to many
private, international schools that are looking for similar solutions.

Page 4
Proposed dissemination of results:
EABH Community
1. Reports for future IB and AdvancED accreditation visits
2. Presentation to school board for action and budgeting of resources
3. Presentation to teachers to serve as a lead-in to IB self-review: We will use this data
to understand how to continuously improve our practice while compiling a wealth of
curriculum that is consistently reviewed.
IB
1. Paper to be submitted to IERD
2. Presentation to workshops and conferences if deemed admissible by IB

*Following the dissemination of publications, the investigator will look to continue such
research in our PYP program to lead to whole school continuum examination.

Further information
Co-investigators (if applicable):
None
Participating schools (if applicable):
None, as of yet
Evidence of investigator (or co-investigator) knowledge of applicable research
methodology:
The investigator will be pursuing this project as the curriculum coordinator of EABH and will
incorporate research methodology along with graduate coursework in Advanced International
Baccalaureate Studies at George Mason University.
Other support (if applicable, e.g. referees, endorsements, additional funding sources):
This research will center on the use of The Mondrian Wall as our curriculum mapping
software interface. This product is emerging for international use and utilizes real-time, live
functionality that increases efficiency and creates connections for teaching content across
curricula. As this software is in its early stages of use and without hard data or research, this
project will serve as fundamental in testing the possibilities for practitioner benefit of an
innovative direction for curriculum mapping design.
The investigator has discussed options with the school if he is granted partial funding from IB.
If he is granted partial funding, Escola Americana de Belo Horizonte is prepared to provide
additional funding.
A letter of support from the schools director is included as Appendix E.

Curriculum and Collaboration Survey
Planning
Planning
|| 1- None || 2- about 15 to 30 minutes || 3- about 30 to 45 minutes || 4- about 45 to 60 minutes || 5- 60 minutes or
more ||
None
about 15 to 30
minutes
about 30 to 45
minutes
about 45 to 60
minutes
60 minutes or
more
About how much time per
week do you spend
informally collaborating
with other teachers about
curriculum?
About how much time per
week do you spend formally
collaborating with other
teachers about curriculum?
Do you feel that you are able to give balanced coverage to the Areas of
Interaction? How or how are you not?
Please discuss specific coverage of each of the Areas of Interaction (Human Ingenuity, Environments, Health and Social
Education, Community and Service).
Which Area of Interaction do you feel is given the least attention or depth of
exploration in your teaching?
-------------------------------------
To what extent do you agree with these statements?
|| 1- Not at all || 2- To some degree || 3 || 4- Mostly || 5- Fully agree ||
Not at all
To some
degree
Mostly Fully agree
Collaborative planning and
reflection addresses the
requirements of the
programme(s).
reflection takes place
regularly and
systematically.
reflection addresses vertical
and horizontal articulation.
reflection ensures that all
teachers have an overview
of students' learning
experiences.
reflection is based on
agreed expectations for
student learning.
reflection incorporates
differentiation for students'
learning needs and styles.
reflection is informed by
assessment of student work
and learning.
reflection recognizes that
all teachers are responsible
Appendix A Curriculum and Collaboration Survey
for language development
of students.
reflection addresses the IB
learner profile attributes.
What makes collaboration difficult?
What might increase collaboration in our department?
Teaching
How effective is differentiation in your classroom?
Please check off the effective feedback checklist options listed here from Tomlinson and McTighe's Integrating
Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design, pages 44 to 57.
Get to know each student as a means of teaching him or her effectively.
Continually map the progress of students against essential outcomes.
Find alternate ways of teaching and alternate paths to learning to ensure continual growth of each student.
Provide support systems that persistently articulate to students and model for them what quality work looks like and
what it takes to attain quality results.
Elicit and value multiple perspectives on issues, decisions, and ways of accomplishing the work of the class.
Make sure all students[...] participate regularlywith no student or group of students either dominating the class or
receding from participation in it.
Design tasks that enable each student to make important contributions to the work of the group.
Make opportunities to communicate individually with individual learners.
Work to understand each students profile of academic strengths and weaknesses.
Observe students working individually, in small groups, and in the class as a whole with the intent to study factors
that facilitate or impede progress for individuals and for the group as a whole.
Create opportunities to learn from parents, guardians, and community members about students.
Explain the benefit in extending students strengths.
Help students acknowledge areas of weakness.
Facilitate ways to remediate or compensate for weaknesses.
Guide students in developing a vocabulary related to learning preferences and in exercising those preferences that
facilitate their growth.
Ask students to reflect on their own growth, factors that facilitate that growth, and likely next steps to ensure
continual growth.
Support students in setting and monitoring personal learning goals.
Allow for students different paces of learning.
Gather both basic and supplementary materials of different readability levels that reflect different cultures,
connect with varied interests, and are in different modes (e.g., auditory and visual).
Experiment with ways to rearrange furniture to allow for whole-class, small-group, and individual learning spaces.
Vary student groupings so that in addition to meeting readiness needs, they enable students to work with peers who
have similar and dissimilar interests, similar and dissimilar learning preferences, in random groups, in groups selected
by the teacher, and in those students select themselves.
Regularly teach to the whole class, to small groups based on assessed need, and to individuals.
Teach in a variety of ways to accommodate students varied readiness needs, interests, and learning preferences.
Ensure that grades communicate both personal growth and relative standing in regard to specified learning
outcomes.
Help students reflect on which strategies work well for them, why that might be the case, and what that reveals to
the student about him- or herself as a learner.
Engage students in setting personal goals and evaluating progress toward those goals.
Reflect consistently on individual and group growth in order to adjust instruction in ways of greatest benefit to
individuals and the class as a whole.
individuals and the class as a whole.
Please use this box to add any other information you feel may be important
about your responses to the last question, "How effective is differentiation in
your classroom?"
To what extent do you agree with these statements?
|| 1- Not at all || 2- To some degree || 3 || 4- Mostly || 5- Fully agree ||
Not at all
To some
degree
Mostly Fully agree
The content of my
instruction makes students
aware of international
issues.
My students learn how to
learn.
My students frequently solve
problems.
My students design
problems to solve
themselves.
My students communicate
and collaborate to solve
problems.
My learning environment
fosters questioning,
patience, openness to fresh
ideas, high levels of trust,
and learning from mistakes
and failures.
My students invent solutions
to real-world problems.
about your responses to the last question.
Assessment
Assessment
|| 1- 0% || 2- about 10% || 3- about 25-40% || 4- about 50-70% || 5- 75% or more ||
0% about 10% about 25-40% about 50-70% 75% or more
What percentage of your
summative assessments
relate to subject area
objectives?
relate to subject area
standards?
provide information that is
used in cross-curricular
discussions with peers?
cover standards from other
subject areas?
cover objectives from other
subject areas?
subject areas?
summative assessments are
interdisciplinary with one
other teacher?
interdisciplinary with two
other teachers?
interdisciplinary with three
or more other teachers?
How effective are your summative assessments?
Please check off the effective feedback checklist options listed here from Grant Wiggins's Educative Assessment, pages
22 and 49.
Provides confirming (or disconfirming) useful evidence of effect relative to intent, for example, a map and road
signs; compares work to anchor papers and rubrics.
Compares current performance and trend to successful result (standard), for example, the taste and appearance of
the food, not the recipe, guarantee the meal will come out as described; student work is compared against exemplars
and criteria.
Timely: immediate or performerfriendly in its immediacy, such as feedback from audience and conductor during a
recital.
Frequent and ongoing.
Descriptive language predominates in assessing aspects of performance, for example, you made a left turn onto
Main St. instead of a right turn; rubrics describe qualities of performance using concrete indicators and traits unique to
each level.
Performer perceives a specific, tangible effect, later symbolized by a score that the performer sees is an apt
reflection of the effect, such as the score given by a band judge in competition, based on specific criteria; the grade or
score confirms what was apparent to the performer about the quality of the performance after it happened.
The result sought is derived from true models (exemplars), for example, a first grade evaluation of reading is
linked to the capacities of a successful adult reader: the reading rubric is longitudinal and anchored by expert reading
behaviors; feedback is given in terms of the goal, such as the specific accomplishments of those who effectively read to
learn.
Enables performers to improve through self assessment and selfadjustment.
Is realistic. The task or tasks replicate the ways in which a person's knowledge and abilities are "tested" in real-
world situations.
Requires judgment and innovation. The student has to use knowledge and skills wisely and effectively to solve unstructured problems, such as when a plan must
be designed, and the solution involves more than following a set routine or procedure or plugging in knowledge.
Asks the student to "do" the subject. Instead of reciting, restating, or replicating through demonstration what he or she was taught or what is already known, the
student has to carry out exploration and work within the discipline of science, history, or any other subject.
Replicates or simulates the contexts in which adults are "tested" in the workplace, in civic life, and in personal life. Contexts involve specific situations that
have particular constraints, purposes, and audiences. Typical school tests are context-
less. Students need to experience what it is like to do tasks in workplace and other real-
life contexts, which tend to be messy and murky. In other words, genuine tasks require good judgment. Authentic tasks undo the ultimately harmful secrecy,-
silence, and absence of resources and feedback that mark excessive school testing.
Assesses the student's ability to efficiently and effectively use a repertoire of knowledge and skill to negotiate a complex task. Most conventional test items
are isolated elements of performance
similar to sideline drills in athletics rather than to the integrated use of skills that a game requires. Good judgment is required
here, too. Although there is, of course, a place for drill tests, performance is always more than the sum of the drills.
Allows appropriate opportunities to rehearse, practice, consult resources, and get feedback on and refine performances and products. Although there is a
role for the conventional "secure" test that keeps questions secret and keeps resource materials from students until during the test, that testing must coexist with
educative assessment if students are to improve performance! if we are to focus their learning, through cycles of performance
feedbackrevisionperformance, on the production of known high-
quality products and standards! and if we are to help them learn to use information, resources, and notes to effectively perform in -
context.
about your responses to the last question, "How effective are your summative
assessments?"
Submit
Powered by Google Docs
Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Additional Terms

Appendix B Assessment Rubric and Differentiation Questionnaire
Criterion A: Cross-Curricular Elements
Maximum: 8

Achievement
Level
Level Descriptor Teacher Comments
0 The assessment piece does not reach a standard described by
any of the descriptors below.

1-2 The assessment piece meets only one or two of the following
criteria:
* allows students to use skills learned in more than one subject
area.
* allows some topical understanding of study in more than one
subject area.
* references either intercultural awareness or a real-world
connection to some degree by the student.

3-4 The assessment piece allows students to use skills learned in
more than one subject area.
The assessment piece allows some topical understanding of
study in more than one subject area.
The assessment piece references either intercultural awareness
or a real-world connection to some degree by the student.

5-6 The assessment piece requires student demonstration of
knowledge that integrates at least one objective from each of
more than one subject area.
The assessment piece demonstrates topical understanding of
study in more than one subject area.
The assessment piece requires a reference to intercultural
awareness by the student.

7-8 The assessment piece requires student demonstration of
knowledge that integrates several objectives from more than one
subject area.
The assessment piece demonstrates contextual understanding of
topics studied in more than one subject area.
The assessment piece requires a demonstration of intercultural
awareness by the student.
The assessment piece expects the student to apply knowledge
and skills innovatively to solve an unstructured problem,
replicating real-world experience.

Criterion B: Area of Interaction Depth
Maximum: 8

Achievement
Level
Level Descriptor Teacher Comments
0 The assessment piece does not reach a standard described by
any of the descriptors below.

1-2 The assessment pieces connection to the AOI seems contrived
and artificial.
The assessment piece limits active involvement and engagement
as the result of a faulty or absent linkage to the AOI.
The assessment piece is missing conceptual understanding and a
connection to a global issue context that could be expected from
depth of AOI study.

3-4 The assessment pieces connection to the AOI may be related,
but integration would possibly seem forced and unnatural.
The assessment piece promotes some involvement and
engagement that is somehow connected to the AOI.
The assessment piece allows for some conceptual exploration of
an issue, although perhaps only in part, through AOI reference.

5-6 The assessment pieces connection to the AOI seems related, but
could be integrated more fully.
The assessment piece promotes some active involvement and
engagement as a direct result of a logical linkage to the AOI.
The assessment piece expects conceptual understanding and
students explore the context of a global issue, although perhaps
only in part, through related AOI study.

7-8 The assessment pieces connection to the AOI reflects fluid
integration.
The assessment piece demands active involvement and
engagement as a direct result of valuable linkage to the AOI.
The assessment piece is rich in conceptual understanding and
students explore the context of a global issue as a result of AOI
study.

Differentiation Questionnaire
Question Response
1 Did this learning experience enable these
particular students to learn this material well?

2 Whose needs were not met with these learning
experiences?

3 Is there any portion of the expected
understandings that the lessons did not address?

4 Were the lessons that guided this assessment
necessary for all students?

5 How does this assessment meet the needs of
students who already understood this material
or who learned very quickly?

6 Does this assessment let me know that students
have mastered this material?

7 How had I taken the instructional pulse of the
students via formative assessments regarding
this material? Did formative assessment
influence instructional decisions that made this
summative assessment appropriate?

8 Did this unit go the way I wanted it to go? If
not, what got me off track?

Currl'cuum Mapppnge
lOiuildinag Aollaboraio and Gomunieaion
ANGELA KOPPANG
This article explores the application and use of curriculum map-
ping as a tool to assist teachers in communicating the content,
skills, and assessments used in their classrooms. The process of
curriculum mapping is explained, and the adaptation of the
process for special education teachers is detailed. Finally, ex-
amples are given of how curriculum mapping can assist both
special and general education teachers in meeting the needs of
students in the classroom. Although this article will apply the
use of curriculum mapping data at the middle school level, the
process of mapping is equally effective at the elementary and
high school levels.
VOL 39, NO. 3, JANUARY 2024 (P. 154-161)
154 IUMVElfflOll IN SCHOOL AND CUIIIC
Appendix C Research Text 1
rs. Anderson, a seventh-grade life science
teacher, has 24 students in her class, 4 of
whom are students with disabilities. Jesse
has a mild learning disability and needs
little assistance in the class, although he has
some difficulties with organization. Jenny and Brian have
mild cognitive disabilities and have some modified expec-
tations for vocabulary and lengthier written assign-
ments. John has multiple disabilities, including moderate
cogrutive impairment and physical disabilities. He is re-
sponsible only for a small part of the vocabulary and con-
tent, and his work is primarily designed to parallel the
classroom content In addition to these students, Mrs.
Anderson has Marina, an English language learner, and 19
other students of differing abilities. Twice each week, Mr.
Jones, a special education teacher, joins Mrs. Anderson,
and they share teaching responsibilities and group stu-
dents for instruction in a variety of ways. On the remain-
ing days, Mrs. Smith, a teaching assistant, is available to
assistMrs. Anderson and individual students in the class-
room. How do these teachers effectively communicate
about the content and skills that will be used in the class-
room? They base all instructional planning-as well as
decisions about curriculum adaptations and modifica-
tions-on the content, skills, and assessments found in
curriculum maps developed by the teachers in the school.
What Is Ourricului Mappiilg?
Curriculum mapping is a method of collecting data
about what is really being taught in schools. It has been
advocated as a method of aligning the written and taught
curriculum since the early 1970s. More recent advances
in technology have expanded the use of curriculum map-
ping as a tool for improving communication among
teachers about the content, skills, and assessments that
are a part of the instructional process. This new applica-
tion of curriculum mapping holds great promise for en-
hancing the collaboration between general and special
education teachers to benefit all learners.
Curriculum mapping is a process used to gather a
database of the operational curriculum of a school (Hayes-
Jacobs, 1997). Although most schools have well-developed
curriculum guides, information is often limited about how
the standards set forth in those guides directly relate to
what is actually happening in the classroom. Most cur-
riculum guides identify what students should know and
be able to do but give little insight into how students ac-
complish this learning or what assessment methods are
used by teachers. In combination with traditional curricu-
lum guides, curriculum maps can provide information
about content and skills used for instruction, as well as
the length of time devoted to various aspects of the cur-
riculum. Including assessment methods on the maps pro-
vides a link to the expectations for the manner in which
students will be expected to demonstrate their knowl-
edge. The details included in the curriculum maps give a
clearer picture of what actually occurs in each classroom.
In the curriculum mapping process, teachers use a
calendar-based system (see Table 1) to map the skills, con-
tent, and assessments used in their classrooms (Hayes-
Jacobs, 1997). Because each teacher takes an individual
approach to meeting the curriculum standards, the indi-
vidual maps will reflect the differences in approaches for
achieving curricular goals. The completed maps may be
used for many purposes, including
o aligning instruction to the written standards;
o developing integrated curriculum units;
o providing a baseline for the curriculum review and
renewal process;
* identifying staff development needs; and
* most important, providing communication among
teachers.
One of the most powerful outcomes of the curricu-
lum mapping process is using the maps as a conimunica-
tion tool among teachers -within a school.
Hayes-Jacobs (1997) said, "Curriculum mapping am-
plifies the possibilities for long-range planning, short-
term preparation, and clear communication" (p. 5). This
Table 1. Life Science Curriculum Map
Life science Content Skills Assessment
January . Characteristics of plants * List characteristics of plants * Plant worksheet
* Seedless plants * Compare vascular & nonvascular plants * Vascular plant art
o Seed plants * Describe & illustrate structures of roots, * Plant drawings
* Complex plants leaves, & stems * Oral presentation of group
* Plant reproduction * List characteristics of seed plants & find work in plant lab
* Rain forest seeds in plant lab * Flower lab report & labels
* Describe & label the functions of the * Rain forest essay
flower in flower dissection lab
* Describe methods of seed dispersal
* Understand the environmental impact of the rain
forest
VOL 39, NO. 3. JANUARY 2004 155
focus on planning, preparation, and communication facili-
tates a higher level of collaboration between general ed-
ucation teachers and special education staff. This process
can involve general and special educators on many differ-
ent levels to enhance effective collaboration within a
school.
Curriculum Mapping Process
While mapping is most effective when the entire school
staff is involved, many school staff members have started
this process by mapping one or two grade levels at an el-
ementary school or one interdisciplinary team or depart-
ment in middle or secondary schools. The process is
easily accomplished by both novice and veteran teachers.
The key to the success of the process is staff discussions
and how data are used after the maps are completed.
Each teacher begins the process of mapping by record-
ing his or her content, skills, and assessments. Using a
computer program enhances the process of mapping by
allowing for revision of the maps, as well as the ability to
share the maps throughout a school by posting them on
a server or school Web site. Several excellent software
programs are specifically designed for curriculum map-
ping; however, it is not necessary to purchase soffivare to
complete the mapping process. Many schools have
started the process with a simple computer template cre-
ated in a word-processing program resembling the one
found in Table 1. This enables teachers to benefit from
the use of technology in the mapping process, even if
they do not have access to curriculum mapping software.
Mapping Content, Skills, and Assessment
Teachers begin by recording the content for the course
or subject area. A curriculum map does not represent a
daily lesson plan but reflects the major concepts and con-
tent that will be covered during that period. In facilitat-
ing the process with teachers in a variety of settings, I
have found that on average, a teacher can map the con-
tent for one course or subject for the entire school year
in 30 to 45 minutes.
After completing the content, the teacher identifies
the key skills that will be used. The list of skills is often
significantly longer than the list of content, and as a re-
sult, the skills portion of the map takes the greatest
amount of time for teachers. I have found that it takes
most teachers 1 to 1N hours to complete the skills portion
of the map for one course or subject area for the school
year.
It is critical to identify the new skills that will be used
and to be specific enough in that description and identi-
fication that it is clear to other readers. For example, in-
stead of indicating that the students will be identifying
the animals found in the rain forest, you would indicate
that they would classify the animals by kingdom, phylum,
and genus. When mapping skills, it is important to iden-
tify the new skill or the new context in which the skill will
be applied. The more clearly the skill is identified, the
more useful the map will be to other teachers. Clarity re-
garding skills will enable special education teachers to
prepare a learner for the skills that will be used and help
the learner compensate for deficits in the skills so he or
she can fully participate in the classroom.
The final element of the curriculum map is assess-
ment-both formal and informal. Assessment strategies
should be identified for all content and skills on the
map. These could include informal assessments, such as
teacher observation and student self-assessments, as well
as formal assessments, such as student projects, presen-
tations, quizzes, and traditional tests. The process of
mapping assessments takes about 30 to 45 minutes to
complete for one course or subject area for the year.
Mapping Time Frame
Mapping one course or subject area for the year will take
about 2 to 3 hours and can be accomplished in several
ways. Mapping can be completed in advance of teaching
by projecting ahead for a month, a semester, or a entire
year. Mapping can be done at the completion of a school
156 lITERVElTIOU III SCHOOL AtD CLIUIC
year in preparation for the next year, or it can be com-
pleted month-by-month as you progress through the
school year. Many teachers find it easiest to map as they
go through the course of the school year and generally
find that it takes only about 15 to 20 minutes a month to
complete the map in this manner. Using a software pro-
gram or computer template for mapping allows teachers
to refine and realign their maps in an ongoing process
and facilitates sharing the maps with other teachers in the
building.
After all teachers complete their maps, copies of all
the maps are given to all teachers in the building. Every-
one reads the maps to gain an understanding of the con-
tent, skills, and assessments that will be covered in each
grade level or course. Sharing maps allows teachers to
gain information and identify repetitions, gaps, and po-
tential areas for integration. Teachers then come to-
gether in mixed groups to discuss the maps and compare
their findings. They determine any immediate revision
points and identify any areas that require research and
planning. Subcommittees are then formed to research
these issues and make recommendations to the staff re-
garding curriculum alignment. The powerful impact of
this process is that it puts decisions about curriculum
alignment in the hands of the teachers who deliver.thC
instruction.
Increased collaboration and communication among
teachers ultimately benefits the students. As the curricu-
lum alignment is achieved, students' educational experi-
ences are enhanced. The curriculum is more coherent
and clear for building knowledge and skills. In addition,
instruction becomes more closely aligned to the state find
district standards on which students will be tested. Fi-
nally, as teachers share infornation about what they teach,
they begin to dialogue and share effective instructional
strategies. General and special education teachers learn
from each other and build strong partnerships that pro-
vide instruction to best meet the needs of their students.
currioulum Mapping
for Special rducaiiov Teachers
Special education teachers use curriculum maps to get a
clear picture of the content, skills, and assessments used
in the general education classroom so they can assist stu-
dents with disabilities in inclusive classroom settings.
The information the map provides is critical in helping
special education teachers understand the instructional
processes students will experience in the general educa-
tion classroom. For those students with more severe dis-
abilities, instruction is often so highly individualized
that maps would have to be specific for each student to
give a clear picture of the instruction. To truly communi-
cate the appropriate information, traditional maps as com-
pleted by general education teachers would need to be
created for each individual student. Because this is al-
ready done as a part of Individualized Education Programs
(IEPs) the process would only increase the paperwork
load for special education teachers. A different process
must be used to develop communication among special
education staff members.
In working in schools with special education teachers
involved in curriculum mapping, I adapted a process that
has been used by library media specialists for special ed-
ucation staff. The special education staff began to com-
pile a list of curriculum-based resources that supported
the content, skills, and assessments outlined in general
education teachers' curriculum maps. These resources
were entered into a searchable database that was accessi-
ble by all staff in the building (see Table 2). The database
included information about the content and skills con-
tained in the materials, along with information such as an
approximation of reading level and/or the grade-level
equivalency of the materials. It included any other spe-
cialized adaptive information that would assist anyone
searching the database in understanding how the mater-
ial might support classroom instruction. The database in-
Table 2. Teacher Curriculum Resource List
Materials Publisher Features Map correlation Location
Trees and Plants in Steck Vaughn Reading Level 3 7th January Mental retardation
the Rain Forest Includes photos, stories, & Life Science classroom
activities about conservation
and environment
Flower parts Teacher made Includes digital photos of 7th January English as a second
parts of flowers with terms- Life Science language classroom
can be matched to actual
flower dissection
Johnny Tremain Recorded books Tape recording of full book 7th February Learning disabilities
text Language Arts classroom
The Call of the Wild Steck Vaughn Reading Level 4 8th December Library
Language Arts
VOL. 39. NJO. 3, JAIIUARY 2004 157
dicated where in the building these materials were lo-
cated and the contact staff person in charge of these ma-
terials.
Thus began a process of sharing curriculum materials
and other supportive resources among special education
staff members, as well as between special and general ed-
ucation teachers. Any staff member can access these ma-
terials to support the learning needs of students who are
not identified for any type of special service programs,
but who may have specialized learning needs. Curricu-
lum materials that parallel the classroom content to a
lower grade-level equivalency reading level could be used
to support English language learners (ELL) or students
with other learning delays. Teachers searching for mate-
rials to assist students in their classrooms can determine
if materials that may fit their purposes are available. In
addition, they know whom to contact about these mate-
rials. This often began a dialogue about strategies and
materials that support learning needs of students and cre-
ated a situation in which the special education teachers
were able to share their specialized skills in teaching strate-
gies with general education teachers. As teachers borrow
and adapt these materials for students in the classroom,
they gain more knowledge and skills in working with spe-
cialized learning needs of students with disabilities. They
are better prepared to serve not only students with dis-
abilities in their classrooms but all students in their class-
rooms.
After general education teachers complete their maps,
special education staff code the resource database to the
classroom teachers' maps, indicating those resources that
specifically support the content, skills, and assessments
used by the general education teachers. Not only does
this facilitate the sharing of resources, it also clearly iden-
tifies those areas in which the school does not currently
have many resources to support the classroom curricu-
lum. Available budget moneys can then be directed to-
ward the purchase or development of materials in those
areas. Rather than having each special education staff
member create his or her own adapted materials, educa-
tors can pool resources and expertise to find or develop
appropriate materials.
Sharing this information helps all educators better di-
rect limited budget resources and gives educators time to
acquire and develop materials that best support the actual
general education classroom curriculum and curriculum
standards. Sharing is facilitated not only between general
education teachers and special education teachers but
also among program areas within and outside of special
education.
Deviefits of OurriculuiAMv1appivig
Although curriculum maps facilitate communication
among teachers, the key benefit is improving the learn-
ing needs of all students, especially individuals with dis-
abilities. Special education teachers are able to develop a
clearer understanding of the general education classroom
curriculum, along with knowledge of the skills and as-
sessments that will be used. This information is vital for
general and special education teachers who collaborate to
support learning in the general education classroom. The
maps also provide a strong basis for making decisions
about inclusion and acquiring knowledge about the nec-
essary level of classroom adaptation and modification to
assist students with disabilites to participate in the gen-
eral education classroom and curriculum. Beneficial in-
formation gained from mapping includes preteaching
skills, correlating community-based outings with upcom-
ing curriculum-based content, and using alternative as-
sessments.
Maps give more detail about the skills and processes
that will be used in the general education classroom than
do traditional content-based lesson plans. Knowing the
skills that will be used in upcoming lessons, special edu-
cation teachers can begin to preteach skills to students
before the skills are introduced in the general education
classroom. This gives students more time and repetition
to learn skills. When the skill is introduced in the general
education classroom, these students will be able to par-
ticipate at a level more comparable to their peers and will
gain confidence in the ability to more fully participate in
the general classroom.
Students in Mrs. Anderson's science class will be work-
ing on a rain forest project that will culminate in an essay
about the rain forest. Mr. Jones, the special education
teacher, works with Mrs. Anderson's curriculum map to
identify the key concepts of the lesson. He prepares a
graphic organizer or concept map for the students to use
in class. This concept map is organized in a manner that
reflects the structure and relationship of the concepts that
will be highlighted in Mrs. Anderson's instruction about
the rain forest. This is a type of content-enhancement rou-
tine that improves the organization of the instruction by
presenting it in a learner-friendly format that emphasizes
the "big picture" ideas (Boudah, Lenz, Bulgren, Schu-
maker, & Deshler, 2000).
Mrs. Anderson and Mr. Jones model using the con-
cept map for organizing instruction while students take
notes or create their own concept maps. Students with
disabilities receive a partially completed concept map
that contains the key ideas and issues from the instruc-
tion (see Figure 1). The students add details to the con-
cept map in each of the identified key categories during
the instruction. Mr. Jones and Mrs. Anderson model how
to appropriately use the concept map by adding informa-
tion to a template of the map on an overhead project.
Having students fill in the information on this concept
map not only helps them stay organized but provides
them the multisensory approach of seeing the key con-
cepts on the graphic organizer, hearing concepts from the
158 IIIIERVYEDIOII IN SCHOOL AID CUnIIC
Figure 1. Rain forest concept map.
teacher, and writing concepts on the map. All of this
helps them retain information while focusing on the
most important concepts (Friend & Bursuck, 2001).
At the end of the lesson, students review the concepts
on the map and prepare questions for review, which they
can then use in class or at home to review and prepare for
a test. Students can use another template of the map as an
organizer to outline the key ideas from their reading as-
signment. Finally, concept maps can become the frame-
work for the information students will use to write their
essays on the rain forest.
To assist students in writing these essays, Mr. Jones
proposes to Mrs. Anderson that he teach a composition
strategy called DEFENDS (Ellis & Lenz, 1987) to the
science class. Mrs. Anderson is not familiar with this
strategy but recognizes that the DEFENDS strategy will
assist students as they write a paper defending their posi-
tion on the destruction of the rain forest (see Figure 1).
The strategy uses the following steps:
D Decide on an exact position
E Examine the reasons for the positions
F Form a list of points that explain each reason
E Expose the position in the first sentence
N Note each reason and supporting points
D Drive home the point in the last sentence
S Search for errors and correct
After Mr. Jones teaches the strategy to the class, he
works with a small group of students who need additional
assistance in the use of the strategy. When students have
completed their essays, all students are asked to use the
steps of the strategy to self-assess and refine them.
Curriculum maps also give special education teachers
more time to develop appropriate classroom activities
that parallel the classroom content for those students
who may need significant modifications to participate in
the general education classroom. Knowledge of the con-
tent, skills, and assessments used in the classroom will
help special education teachers identify activities that will
parallel general education activities and reinforce the
same skills at a different level. Teachers can analyze the
skills involved and determine if the student can perform
the same task as other students, perform the same task
with an easier step, perform the same task with different
materials, or perform a different task with the same theme
(Lowell-York, Doyle, & Kronberg, 1995).
In Mrs. Anderson's science class, students are classify-
ing types of animals by kingdom, phylum, and genus. A
student who is able to do the same task with an easier step
may be classifying an animal only by kingdom. A student
who needs to undertake the same task with different
materials may be using picture cards with the name and
pictures of animals. A student who needs to tackle a dif-
ferent task with the same theme may be naming animals
or detertnining if they live on land or water.
Knowledge of the content, skills, and assessments that
are part of the general education curriculum assists special
education teachers in planning community-based learn-
ing experiences that support the content being taught in
inclusive settings. Using the community-based experiences
to support inclusive classroom learning can also provide
VOL. 39, NO. 3. JAIIUARY 2094 159
Table 3. DEFENDS Strategy
D Decide on an exact position
E Examine the reasons for the positions
F Form a list of points that explain each reason
E Expose the position in the first sentence
N Note each reason & supporting points
D Drive home the point in the last sentence
s Search for errors and correct
opportunities for special education students to share what
they have gained with the general education students. If
the science class is studying reptiles, a community-based
learning experience might include a trip to a local pet
store or zoo. Students may take along an instant picture
or digital camera to record the reptiles they see on the
outing, or they may gather information about the reptiles
to share with their classmates when they return to school.
The photos and information gathered can become a part
of the curriculum materials for the special education stu-
dents as well as supporting materials for the general edu-
cation teachers and students.
One particularly successful community-based outing
involved having students purchase and prepare lab kits
for use in the science classroom. The science teacher pre-
pared a list of materials needed for an upcoming lab in
which students would dissect and label parts of a flower.
On a community-based outing, students purchased the
materials for the lab activity. They also visited a green-
house to learn about plants and to purchase the flowers
to be used in the lab. Students then worked with a teach-
ing assistant to learn how to assemble the materials into
lab kits to be used in the science lab. This collaboration
supported the learning needs of the special education stu-
dents and assisted the general education teacher in pre-
paring lab materials. The greatest benefit was the pride
students had later that day when they participated in the
lab activity that they had prepared. The science teacher
recognized their efforts, and they were able to share ma-
terials and photos they had gathered in their trip to the
greenhouse for the benefit of all students.
Finally, assessment information included on the cur-
riculum maps will help special education teachers under-
stand how general education teachers will be assessing
students' accomplishment in terms of the knowledge,
skills, and processes in the curriculum. Special education
teachers can assist students in developing study guides
and equip students with test-taking strategies that fit the
assessments used by general education teachers.
The student decides on his or her personal position about the
destruction of the rain forest
The student determines & explains why he or she holds these
beliefs
The student makes a list of points about the rain forest that
supports his or her beliefs
The student composes a topic sentence that supports his or
her position
The student creates short paragraphs that elaborate on the
points identified earlier
The student restates his or her position & reasons in the
summary statement
The student self-edits the essay
Special education teachers can use samples of class-
room projects and assessments to build a portfolio that
will demonstrate the attainment of EEP goals. In addi-
tion, information on the curriculum map offers general
and special educators the opportunity to collaborate on
alternative methods of assessing student knowledge. Be-
cause of the needs of their students, many special educa-
tion teachers have a great deal to offer general education
teachers in the development of assessment methods that
do not rely solely on traditional tests and quizzes. As gen-
eral education teachers collaborate on designing these al-
ternate assessments, they improve their own skills in
using multiple assessment methods.
1 BO IIITERVEIITID III SCHOOL AND CIDIIC
The greatest benefit of using curriculum maps is the
improved communication among all teachers in the school.
As special and general education teachers have a better
level of understanding of the content, skills, and assess-
ments used in classrooms, they can build stronger collab-
orations to assist all students with special learning needs.
General education teachers can gain a wealth of knowl-
edge about strategies and structures that support learning
from special education teachers. Special education teach-
ers benefit from curriculum mapping by gaining a deeper
understanding of the general classroom curriculum and
how they can create meaningful curricular connections
for students. Improved communication among all teach-
ers in the school provides professional educators with an-
other tool for effectively enhancing the learning of all
students in the classroom, especially students with dis-
abilities.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Angela Koppang, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Educa-
tional Leadership Department at the University of North Da-
kota and specializes in the areas of curriculum, instruction, as-
sessment, and school leadership. She is a former elementary and
middle school teacher and administrator and serves as a consul-
tant in the areas of curriculum development and alignment.
Address: Angela Koppang, Department of Educational Leader-
ship, Box 7189, Grand Forks, ND 58201; e-mail: angela_
koppang@und.nodak.edu
REFERENCES
Boudah, D. J., Lenz, B. K, Bulgren,J. A., Schumaker,J. B., & Deshler,
D. D. (2000). Don't water down! Enhance content learning through
the unit organizer routine. Teacbing Exceptional Cbildren, 32(3), 48-56.
Ellis, E., & Lenz, K (1987). A component analysis of effective learning
strategies for LD students. Learning Disabilities Focus, 2, 94-107.
Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (2001). Including students witb special
needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers (3rd ed.). Needham
Heights, MA. Allyn & Bacon.
Hayes-Jacobs, H. (1997). Mapping the big piCtture: Integrating curriculum
& assessmtent K-12. Alexandria, VA. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Lowell-York, J., Doyle, M. E., & Kronberg, R. (1995). Curriculum as
everytbing students learn in scbool: Individualizing learning opportzni-
ties. Baltimore: Brookes.
VOL. 39, rUO. 3. JAIIUARY 2DO4 161
Curriculum Mapping in Higher Education:
AVehicle for Collaboration
Kay Pippin Uchiyama & Jean L. Radin
Published online: 24 June 2008
#
Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008
Abstract This qualitative study makes the case for the implementation of curriculum
mapping, a procedure that creates a visual representation of curriculum based on real time
information, as a way to increase collaboration and collegiality in higher education.
Through the use of curriculum mapping, eleven faculty members in a western state
university Teacher Licensure program aligned and revised the teacher education curriculum
across a sequence of courses. An increase in collaboration and collegiality among faculty
emerged as an unintended outcome as a result of participation in the project.
Key words curriculummapping
.
collaboration
.
collegiality
.
higher education
To go fast, go alone. To go farther, go together. (African proverb)
The norms of the higher education community at large encourage autonomy and
independence. Junior faculty often speak of the loneliness and isolation that they encounter
Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280
DOI 10.1007/s10755-008-9078-8
Kay Pippin Uchiyama is currently the Assessment Coordinator for the Poudre School District in Fort
Collins, Colorado. During this study, she was an Assistant Professor of Teacher Education at Colorado
State University and a co-primary investigator for the Preparing Tomorrows Teachers to Use Data
grant. She received her Ph.D. in Instruction and Curriculum in the Content Areas with an emphasis on
Teacher Education and Learning to Teach from the University of Colorado at Boulder. Her interests
include data driven instruction, assessment for learning, teacher education, professional development
schools, and mathematics education. Her email is kuchiyam@psdschools.org.
Jean L. Radin is an adjunct professor at Colorado State University and a co-primary investigator for the
Preparing Tomorrows Teachers to Use Data grant. She received her Ph.D. from Colorado State University.
Her interests are brain-based teaching and learning, data driven instructional practices, teacher education
and professional development schools. Her email is jradin@cahs.colorado.edu.
K. P. Uchiyama (*)
Poudre School District, 513 Skysail Lane, Fort Collins, CO 80525, USA
e-mail: mkuchiyama@comcast.net
J. L. Radin
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
e-mail: jean.radin@colostate.edu
Appendix D Research Text 2
and frequently cite this as a reason for leaving an institution (Barnes et al. 1998). Tierney
and Rhoads (1994) found that a lack of a sense of community was a key determinant in the
decision to leave academia. Trower noted, the single most important concern [of faculty]
was autonomy in the workplace (as cited in Fogg 2006, p. 1). Furthermore, in the pursuit
of tenure and promotion, single-authored publications are more highly rated than are those
with two or more authors, which can add to the pressure and sense of isolation. As Palmer
(1998) summarized,
Academics often suffer the pain of dismemberment. On the surface, this is the pain of
people who thought they were joining a community of scholars but find themselves in
distant, competitive and uncaring relationships with colleagues [emphasis added] (p. 20).
Organizations beyond higher education have shifted toward cultures where the norms of
autonomy and independence are replaced by the norms of collegiality and collaboration.
For example, the U.S. Department of Labor (1991) established skills and competencies for
the workplace; and two of these elements, sociability and interpersonal skills, directly relate
to norms of collegiality and collaboration. Sociability is defined as demonstrate[ing]
understanding, friendliness, adaptability, empathy, and politeness in group settings (U.S.
Department of Labor 1991, p. x). Interpersonal skills are defined as participate[ing] as a
member of a team, contributing to group efforts, negotiation, working toward agreement,
and resolving divergent interests (U.S. Department of Labor 1991, p. xi). Employers have
identified these two elements as desirable traits for the workplace.
Tierney (1999) compared the values and norms of higher education to those of the
workplace. He argued that the values of competition and individualism in higher education
are replaced by cooperation and teamwork outside of the higher education arena. He also
argued that the culture of higher education encourages employees to fly solo whereas
most workplace organizations expect their employees to fly in formation (Tierney 1999).
Whereas in higher education individuals often complete their own projects in isolation which
may or may not have relevance to the departments or schools goals, workplace
organizations tend to rely on teams that work together toward a common goal (Tierney 1999).
While it is not universally true that the culture of higher education is individualistic,
experts in the field of higher education research suggest that, in order to survive, the culture
must shift from one that values individualism and autonomy to one that values collegiality
and collaboration (Simpson and Thomas as cited in Van Patten 2000; Tierney 1999). Fogg
(2006) reported that collegiality is an important factor in job satisfaction for todays junior
professors, often more important than salary. Furthermore, funding organizations encourage
collaborations between and among individuals, departments, institutions of higher
education, and the community. For example, the National Science Foundation Grant
Proposal Guide (2007) encourages group proposals and interdisciplinary projects with
specific funding solicitations often requiring collaborations.
This article describes a project where eleven school of education faculty members used
curriculum mapping to align and integrate the curriculum across a sequence of courses.
Curriculum mapping is a procedure which promotes the creation of a visual representation
of curriculum based on real time information (Jacobs 1997). Using a template with
predetermined categories and format, instructors map their curriculum as it occurs, in real
time. Real time in this context means when the curriculum is delivered, rather than as
projected in a course syllabus prior to the course or after the course is completed. The
curriculum maps are aggregated first horizontally by course and then vertically across all
courses in a sequence. All faculty members review the maps, identifying strengths, gaps,
272 Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280
and overlaps. Once the review is complete, the faculty determines what and where to add or
eliminate content and/or strategies, which results in a more streamlined curriculum and
integrated program. These maps become living documents for course instructors; and they
can be frequently revisited and revised as courses are adapted to the needs of the established
curriculum, the needs of students, or the incorporation of new instructors into the program.
While the original intent of our project was to align and revise the teacher education
curriculum, an unexpected and beneficial outcome emerged: we found that collaboration
and collegiality increased as a result of participation in the project. To explain this outcome,
we first define the meaning of collaboration and collegiality as it applies in the context of
the curriculum mapping process. Next, we describe how the process was implemented
including background information, a rationale for selecting curriculum mapping, and
methods of data collection. Our findings follow; and finally, we share our conclusions, and
implications.
Collaboration and Collegiality
In any community, collaboration and collegiality are sought after ideals. Haworth and
Conrad (1997) noted that collegial and supportive cultures are an important component of
high quality programs. As Grossman et al. (2001) eloquently explained, The association
between community and the good life reaches across religious, cultural, and philosophical
traditions where the value of individuals working together for the common good is upheld
and respected (p. 945). The English language is replete with common sayings that
illustrate the values of collegiality and collaboration. For example, united we stand,
divided we fall, many hands make light work, and circle the wagons. Other examples
come from famous individuals in history. Isaac Newton (1675) wrote, If I have seen
further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants (as cited in Kaplan 1992),
and Henry Ford (n.d.) the developer of the assembly line stated, If everyone is moving
forward together, then success takes care of itself (Thinkexist.com 2008). In short, these
values allow communities to function and grow productively.
For this article we use the following definitions: collegialitycooperative interaction
among colleagues and collaborationto work together, especially in a joint intellectual
effort (www.Dictionary.com).
The values of collegiality and collaboration are embedded in the curriculum mapping
process by providing a structure for all to engage in collective dialogue about the
curriculum, instruction, and students learning (Donald 1997; Udelhofen 2005). Curriculum
mapping fosters respect for the professional knowledge and expertise of all instructors. It
allows all participants to examine, or re-examine, their individual and collective beliefs
about teaching and learning in a structured and safe setting.
The Process of Curriculum Mapping
Curriculum mapping is a cyclical process that consists of five stages. Figure 1 provides a
graphic representation of this process. In Stage 1, individual instructors develop maps of
their courses in real time as they teach over the span of a semester. Stage 2 begins with all
instructors of a particular course working together to aggregate the maps. In Stage 3, all
faculty members involved review all the maps in a program or set sequence of courses. If
Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280 273
the number of faculty members or the number of instructors per course is small, this can be
done as one large group. If not, Jacobs (1997) suggested creating a number of heterogeneous
groups consisting of those who represent all courses and having these groups review the
vertical array of maps, looking for alignment, gaps, overlaps, inconsistencies, and strengths.
A representative from each group records the findings, aggregates them, and then reports
out to the large group. Stage 4 includes all faculty members and focuses on identifying
areas in need of alignment, revision, and/or elimination. The group prioritizes those areas
that need attention first and those that need further study. The group then develops a plan
following with action in Stage 5. The process comes full circle in Stage 6. The result is a
curriculum that is fluid and adaptable as the needs of students, policies, and new research
findings change over time.
The Project
This section details background information leading up to the project, the sequence for
implementation of curriculum mapping, data collection for documentation, and data
analysis.
Background of the Project
In the fall of 2005, the School of Education (SOE) at an institution in a western state was
part of a grant project involving four institutions of higher education across the state. This
project focused on developing and integrating data driven instructional practices into
Teacher Licensure curricula. As part of the grant, the four institutions together developed
Information-Based Educational Practice (IBEP) standards, which accurately described the
Stage 1
Develop Individual Maps
for each course
Stage 6 Stage
Repeat the process Review and aggregate
maps (horizontally) by course
State 5 Stage 3
Revise courses and Aggregate the maps
implement revisions (horizontally) by course

Stage 4
The group identifies strengths,
gaps, overlaps, etc.
2
Fig. 1 The process of curriculum mapping.
274 Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280
process of data driven instruction. From there, each institution determined its own methods
for data collection and procedures for the integration and implementation of the IBEP
standards into the curriculum.
At our institution we, as the primary investigators for the grant and members of the
licensure faculty, needed to establish if, where, and when the IBEP standards occurred in
the Teacher Licensure programs course sequence. To do that meant closely examining the
curriculum in place. We were aware that K-12 schools and districts were using curriculum
mapping to form a picture of their curriculum, so we decided to employ the same process.
We recognized that this work would mean a change in how the Teacher Licensure faculty
operated. As Jacobs (2004) had stated, [through curriculum mapping] colleagues create
new pathways in a shared profession (p. x). First, we examined the current literature on
change to structure this process. We drew heavily on Fullans (2001) work, noting that
successful change depends on shared meaning among all involved. While the Teacher
Licensure faculty members were all involved with preparing pre-service teachers though a
set course sequence, the challenge was to create shared meaning and buy-in to the project.
Sequence for Implementation of Curriculum Mapping
We had a two-year time period based on our grant funding. To facilitate the work, we
organized to follow the university semester system. During the first semester, we developed
a timeframe for the work and identified and planned the use of available technology for
implementation. We also reviewed and aligned the licensure programs foundation and
belief statements with our states Department of Education Performance-Based Teacher
Education Standards, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
standards, principles from the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
standards, performance indicators from our states Council on Higher Education, and the
Information-Based Educational Practice Standards developed by the four institutions. The
result was a written document that outlined our program. However, having a written
document was no guarantee that these standards and beliefs were translated into our teacher
education courses. We also suspected that course syllabi might or might not reflect what was
actually implemented in the classroom. For example, when we reviewed the course syllabi,
we found that not all faculty members were teaching to the states performance standards for
teachers, even though these standards were mandated. In fact, one colleague commented
during a licensure faculty meeting discussion, Teach to standards? What happened to
academic freedom? At this point, we knew mapping the curriculum would provide a forum
for sharing, discussing, analyzing, and realigning coursework with standards.
Using data to develop commitment. Research has shown that change takes place at the
individual level prior to the organizational level (Hall and Hord 2006, p. 7). In order for
change to be successful, there must be pressure and support for those engaged in the change
(Fullan 2001). We knew we needed to instill a sense of urgency to show licensure faculty
members that change was necessary so we reviewed student satisfaction data such as
individual course evaluations. These data indicated that students felt there was considerable
overlap and repetition among the courses in the program sequence. An upcoming state
accreditation visit and a national accreditation visit also provided pressure to review the
current curriculum. Using data to inform practice was an ongoing theme of our work.
Inviting participation, constructing a timeframe, collecting data. We provided support for
change by using existing scheduled meetings to inform the licensure faculty about the data
Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280 275
and the process of curriculum mapping, by offering professional development activities to
help implement the mapping process, and by disseminating handouts and articles. We also
offered small stipends from the grant monies to those who volunteered to engage in the
work. At the beginning of the project, nine instructors of two key licensure courses in the
six-course sequence volunteered to participate in the process. In return, over the two-year
period of the project, these participants agreed to map their courses for a minimum of one
semester in real time, attend meetings to aggregate the maps, complete an open ended
survey of the process, and participate in an end of the project interview.
To supplement the survey and interview data, we employed participant observation data
collection methods to include detailed field notes of each meeting.
Initially our colleagues were skeptical about curriculum mapping, but their thinking
changed once they engaged in the process. For example, one colleague commented: My
very first reactions were that I wasnt exactly sure what curriculum mapping was, but when
I learned about it and discovered what the purpose of it was, I was very interested
(Participant A). Still another colleague stated,
I must admit that I was a little concerned because I thought it was going to be an
additional job, additional work to do around something that I thought I had already fairly
well gotten a handle on. I was one of those people that looked at what I taught after I
taught it, and then made changes before I went on. And so I didnt see much difference
between what I was doing and what [curriculum mapping] was doing. (Participant C)
Technology decisions. We placed a mapping template for all to use on the Teacher
Licensure WebCT page. The nine instructors mapped their courses onto the template in real
time throughout this first semester. Technology made creating, storing, and sharing
information smooth and also easy to revise. It increased collaboration among the faculty
members as we did not have to deal with using unwieldy posters or large sheets of butcher
paper covered with sticky notes.
Implementing the curriculum mapping process. The curriculum mapping process addressed
three critical questions:
& Who is doing what?
& How does the work align with the Teacher Licensure programs goals and
standards?
& Are we working efficiently and effectively? (Jacobs 2004)
Over the course of the first semester, each instructor completed a map independently,
without influence from colleagues. In the first month of the next semester, the instructors
for each particular course met to aggregate their maps. During this process, the course
leaders were encouraged to keep in mind the need for individual creativity but to maintain
fidelity to the states established Performance-Based Standards for Teachers. The result was
a course map, a visual representation of what was taught in that specific course, which
included content, materials, standards, and assessments.
The remainder of the second semester was spent with the nine instructors meeting every
other week to develop an aggregated map that represented what was taught in both courses
in the licensure sequence. The meetings were held in a comfortable conference room with
computer access so that the work could be projected on a screen for all to see. The group
elected a meeting facilitator from within itself and then began by looking at the courses
276 Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280
sequentially to identify strengths, gaps, redundancies, and misalignments for these key
courses while combining the two maps. The group came to agreement as to what content
should be kept in the course sequence, what should be dropped, and what new content
should be added. For example, during a combined course meeting the group discovered that
the same activity around learning theory was contained in both courses. Together, they
decided in which course this content and activity belonged and eliminated it from the other
course. One participant commented:
I really liked the accountability piece of the mapping. It was exciting to see, as the two
teams met together, that one [course in the sequence] would introduce something, the
next [course] would go a little bit more in depth, the next [course] would have the
students do that benchmark, standard, concept or topic full-blown. (Participant D)
Another colleague stated:
I began to look at the mapping as a way of bringing life to the syllabus, that it was not
only a work done in isolation where I thought something was done right or
wrong, but all the work done in the process of collaboration, which of course we
know is the strongest way to have collegiality. (Participant F)
A third colleague noted,
We identified specific needs for professional development as we shared our
knowledge base and pedagogical practices. We were communicating, collaborating,
articulating, and aligning! We were building the shared meaning that is so important to
successful change. (Participant B)
For the remainder of the semester, the group continued to meet, discuss, and revise their
respective syllabi, always keeping in mind the three critical questions for curriculum
mapping. This cycle concluded at the end of the second semester of implementation.
At the beginning of the second year, we invited instructors from the other licensure
courses to participate. Two faculty members representing two additional courses in the course
sequence volunteered to participate, thus increasing our group to eleven members in total.
Data Analysis
We analyzed our interview data, survey data, and observation notes employing Miles and
Hubermans (1994) four step process: underline key terms, restate key phrases, reduce the
phrases and create clusters, and reduce clusters and attach labels (p. 87). The clusters of
collaboration and collegiality unexpectedly emerged across all data sources.
Finding
Although the original intent of curriculum mapping was to align the Teacher Licensure
coursework with the state standards, we were surprised by the unexpected findingthat the
curriculum mapping process fostered increased collegiality and collaboration among the 11
participating faculty members. These faculty members became more energized and engaged
with colleagues, mitigating the isolation often felt by many in higher education (Damrosch
1995; Goodlad 1984; Lortie 1975; Sarason 1996). Throughout this process, faculty
members discussed which state standards and related topics should be included in which
Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280 277
courses. Some topics were eliminated in certain courses and added to others. Faculty also
discussed strategies and activities that they used in classes, again eliminating duplications
and filling gaps. Furthermore, the discussions sparked new ideas for teaching the course
content. For example, after one mapping meeting a faculty member commented, It was
really exciting to talk about what we were doing in our classes and to get ideas for different
ways to teach the same content. I have never seen so much energy! (Participant E).
Another participant wrote in the end of the semester survey of the process:
It was really fun to exchange ideas and determine how each of us taught the major
components of [our course]. We shared numerous materials, activities, and resources
with each other. As a result of the mapping, Im energized to teach a number of things
differently next year. (Participant A)
Still another colleague noted:
I have found both the mapping exercise and the discussion with colleagues to be
invaluable. Armed with the knowledge of my own pedagogical skills, tools, and
desires, I attended meetings with others who brought their own toolbox to the
common table. I am appreciating both the similarities and differences in the ways my
colleagues approach our common course. (Participant D)
One participant stated in the final interview, its been good for our faculty, my curriculum
is far richer because of [curriculum mapping] (Participant C).
Other collaborative efforts developed from the curriculum mapping process. The
aggregated curriculum map was enlarged to poster-size and prominently displayed and
referred to at every Teacher Licensure meeting, and, most recently, during our external
review visit. This large map was used to clarify the licensure program, coursework, and
standards for the Teacher Licensure faculty and SOE faculty members other than licensure
faculty. The map was also used to clarify the program for instructors from other schools and
colleges across the university who teach content methods courses for our students. The
SOE annual report featured the map as well.
Our desire to collaborate on scholarly work increased as a result of participation in this
project. With input from colleagues, several faculty members prepared joint presentations
and papers for three different national education conferences on the topic of curriculum
mapping in higher education. In addition, three faculty members presented a poster session
on the same topic at the 2007 American Educational Research Association conference in
Chicago. This collaboration broke down the academic barriers of competition that keep us
fragmented (Palmer 1998).
Conclusion
In our experience, curriculum mapping provided a method to not only align and articulate
the curriculum, but also a way to foster collaboration and collegiality of those participating
in the process. The interaction among participants in this project promoted collaboration
and collegiality, allowing the participants to share knowledge and beliefs about teaching
and learning. Participants in our study examined and reflected upon their practice in this
collegial setting. Our experience with this process exemplified the following:
Curriculum mapping shatter[s] the glass ceiling of teaching in isolation. It move[s] us
toward clear communication, meaningful connections, and understanding the power of
278 Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280
professional collaboration that truly [makes] a difference. (Chapman, as cited in
Jacobs 2004, p. 79)
As Massy and Wilger (1994) have found, keeping the curriculum modern and relevant
through shared participation increases faculty members interest and engagement in
teaching and learning as well as updating disciplinary knowledge and meeting students
needs. We have continued to engage in this process, knowing there is no epilogue once the
process begins (Jacobs 2004, p. 8).
Curriculum mapping is an ongoing, dynamic process. Our faculty recognizes that, by
accepting this as an ongoing process, we will continue to grow as a collaborative
community, to connect with each other to decrease isolation, to consider curricular changes
carefully, and to promote collegiality. We highly recommend curriculum mapping as a
vehicle for other institutions or departments who wish or need to improve not only course
alignment and articulation, but also want to promote a supportive, collaborative culture that
enhances the learning of all stakeholders (Donald 1997; Haworth and Conrad 1997).
References
Barnes, L. L. B., Agago, M. O., & Coombs, W. T. (1998). Effects of job-related stress on faculty: Intention to
leave academia. Research in Higher Education, 39(4), 457469.
Damrosch, D. (1995). We scholars: Changing the culture of the university. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Dictionary.com (2007). Retrieved January 21, 2008, from http://www.dictionary.com
Donald, J. (1997). Improving the environment for learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fogg, P. (2006, September 29). Young Ph.D.s say collegiality matters more than salary. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, p. 1.
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community. Teachers
College Record, 103(6), 9421012.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2006). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Haworth, J., & Conrad, C. (1997). Emblems of quality in higher education. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Jacobs, H. H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment K-12. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jacobs, H. H. (2004). Getting results with curriculum mapping. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Kaplan, J. (Ed.). (1992). Familiar quotations: A collection of passages, phrases, and proverbs traced to their
sources in ancient and modern literature (16th ed.). Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, p. 281.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Massy, W. F., & Wilger, A. K. (1994). Overcoming hollowed collegiality. Change, 26(4), 1120.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
National Science Foundation. (2007). Grant Proposal Guide. Retrieved February 22, 2008, from www.nsf.
gov/publications/
Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher's life. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sarason, S. B. (1996). Revisiting the culture of the school and the problem of change. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
ThinkExist.com (2008, April 1). Henry Ford quotes. Retrieved May 1, 2008, from http://en.thinkexist.com/
quotes/Henry_Ford/
Tierney, W. G. (1999). Faculty productivity and academic culture. In W. G. Tierney (Ed.), Faculty
productivity: Facts, fictions, and issues (pp. 3954). New York, NY: Falmer Press.
Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280 279
Tierney, W. G., & Rhoads, R. A. (1994). Faculty socialization as a cultural process: A mirror of institutional
commitment. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 93-6. Washington, DC: The George
Washington University School of Education and Human Development.
Udelhofen, S. (2005). Keys to curriculum mapping: Strategies and tools to make it work. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
U.S. Department of Labor. (1991). What work requires of schools: A SCANS report for America 2000.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
Van Patten, J. J. (2000). Higher education culture: Case studies for a new century. Lanham, NY: University
Press of America, Inc.
280 Innov High Educ (2009) 33:271280
Appendix E Director Letter
Appendix F References Ref
Refeiences
Inteinational Baccalauieate 0iganization. (2uu8). !"#$ %&'()*&+,-+*./0)+,1'))
*&2-1+-/. Caiuiff, Whales uB: Authoi.
Inteinational Baccalauieate 0iganization. (2uu2). !+33./)4/2&0)*&'5&2((/)2&/20))
'6)+,1/&2-1+',7 Caiuiff, Whales uB: Authoi.
Koppang, A. (2uu4). Cuiiiculum Napping: Builuing Collaboiation anu
Communication. 8,1/&9/,1+',)+,):-;''.)2,3)<.+,+-, =>(S), 1S4-161.
Ritchhait, R. (2uu2).8,1/../-1?2.)-;2&2-1/&$)@;21)+1)+0A)@;4)+1)(211/&0A)2,3);'@)1'))
5/1)+1. San Fiancisco: }ossey-Bass.
Tiilling, B., & Fauel, C. (2uu9).BC01)-/,1?&4)0D+..0$)./2&,+,5)6'&).+6/)+,)'?&)1+(/0. San
Fiancisco: }ossey-Bass.
0chiyama, K., & Rauin, }. (2uu9). Cuiiiculum Napping in Bighei Euucation: A
vehicle foi Collaboiation.8,,'921+9/)E+5;/&)F3?-21+',, ==(4), 271-28u.
Wiggins, u. P. (1998).F3?-21+9/)200/00(/,1$)3/0+5,+,5)200/00(/,10)1')+,6'&()2,3))
+(*&'9/)01?3/,1)*/&6'&(2,-/. San Fiancisco: }ossey-Bass.
Willingham, B. T. (2uu9). G;4)3',H1)01?3/,10).+D/)0-;''.I$)2)-'5,+1+9/)0-+/,1+01))
2,0@/&0)J?/01+',0)2K'?1);'@)1;/)(+,3)@'&D0)2,3)@;21)+1)(/2,0)6'&)1;/))
-.200&''(. San Fiancisco: }ossey-Bass.
Woimeli, R. (2uu6). %2+&)+0,H1)2.@240)/J?2.$)200/00+,5)L)5&23+,5)+,)1;/))
3+66/&/,1+21/3)-.200&''(. Poitlanu, Ne.: Stenhouse Publisheis.

Jeff Thompson Research Application

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jeff Thompson Research Application

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page 1

International Baccalaureate Organization 2011

You might also like